Obviously, a better review algorithm is required, To avoid hungry condition of some branches.
Now the whole system feels more like a client/server model. Maybe a peer to peer like model behaves better. 在 2012-3-13，15:13，"Jesse Andrews" <anotherje...@gmail.com> 写道： > Maybe it is just me, but most reviews seem to take hours to days to > complete. I'm been sitting here waiting for a one line change to get > a second "+2 / approved" so I can redeploy our test cluster for the > last 2 hours. > > When lots of people are active, reviews can be approved in quickly - > especially when people reach out to others who are familiar with the > code in question. > > Do we need a "time-gate" or can you use a feed-reader and > https://github.com/openstack/nova/commits/master.atom to read patches > were approved while one is away/sleeping/time off? (opening bugs or > asking questions in IRC is always acceptable regardless of how long > the review took) > > Delaying by 2 hours on a weekday at noon vs 2am saturday night? > Would we then start debating how best to gate at different times based > on when people are available? > > That said if the complexity added is minimal I don't think it would > hurt - it is another thing that our (small) CI team has to do. > > Jesse > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 11:51 PM, Mark McLoughlin <mar...@redhat.com> wrote: >> On Mon, 2012-03-12 at 17:57 -0500, Josh Kearney wrote: >>> Is this is really a problem that needs solving? I'd like to believe that no >>> member of Nova Core would approve something that they aren't familiar with. >> >> I think the issue is more a case of allowing some time for other >> reviewers to come along and catch issues before it gets merged. >> >> Sometimes there can be a few folks working through an issue together and >> the patch gets pushed and approved so quickly that no-one else gets a >> chance to review. >> >>> IMHO, we should be making better attempts at not letting branches sit >>> around for days/weeks at a time. >>> >>> On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Joe Gordon <j...@cloudscaling.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi All, >>>> >>>> I have noticed that some Gerrit branches get approved very quickly, >>>> sometimes in a matter of minutes. While most of the time these branches >>>> are vetted properly, the window for reviewing can be so small that a >>>> non-trivial branch lands but without enough vetting. If someone is in a >>>> meeting for half on hour they may miss the entire review window. To fix >>>> this problem I propose a minimum time frame (should be overridable in an >>>> emergency) for a branch to be approved, perhaps 2 hours. This time frame >>>> would start on 'Upload time.' >> >> I like the idea, personally. Even in the case of "emergencies", I don't >> think 2 hours is unreasonable. >> >> Cheers, >> Mark. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack >> Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net >> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack >> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack > Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
